Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Mon May 12, 2025 11:25 pm

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 142 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 2:29 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 11:17 am
Posts: 18499
Location: threeohfivethree
Jarusa wrote:
btw agree with the posters here highlighting the green-ness of this development. It is window dressing and calling the development green is stretching things. Perhaps it could best be described as green for a football club development.


Go on - name names.

I did... :oops:

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 2:33 pm 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 11:44 am
Posts: 2000
GWS wrote:
Very, very, very, very, very wierdly...




...I'm with Melvey. :shock: :shock: :shock:


If the club is serious about going green then GO GREEN.

The environmental benefits of what's being proposed aren't much greater than what's now standard for a bullshit "5 star" housing project (which is currently ridiculously low).

If we want to be seen to be leaders in the area we should be setting out to be carbon neutral at the least and preferably having a positive impact on the environment. There are that many ways we can do it and they're all relatively affordable over the medium term (and will in fact pay for themselves within a 10 year time frame).

John M wrote:
Because even a five minute study of Visy Park would tell you that the environmental story is little more than window dressing. It's a high-performance centre for elite athletes, with some community access. The 'green' tinge is a nice way for Visy's sponsorship to have some relevance, and for the money Visy pays to Juddy to remain legit.


Why put the greenwash on a development that's a lame-arsed attempt at being green when there's enough there to sell it as an elite training facility?

By connecting VISY to a project that's only paying lip-service to environmental issues all they due is question the validity of VISY's own green credentials.

As Melvey effectively said (did I really write that? :shock: ) there's no need to talk up the lame parts of this. It's all a bit "Beyond Petroleum" for mine.

Maybe the building's green credentials will be worked up over the rest of the design phase but if you were going to launch this as a "green building" then you'd want to be listing quite a few more benefits than what's currently been shown.

Had we done this properly (and I mean really properly) then the world's media would have been knocking on the door to know about the professional sporting club that is paving the way to a genuine green future.

I can't hear them knocking...

Other than that - great that the players will finally have some decent facilities.


For Goodness Sake...please dont put wind in Melveys sails.

It is a football club...with football related goals and objectives. The environmetally friendly aspect is to be congratulated, however it should not and must not be put out of all proportion.

The Visy tie-up is to sponsor the clu for 5 mil. So we by default take on some...thats right some of the credentials or selling points of the sponsor.

We are a Football Club.

If the sponsor was Vodafone would we be up in arms because Swan didnt pull a phone apart and explain how the flowering thing works.

FFS keep things in perspective

_________________
Go BLues


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 2:35 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am
Posts: 17958
GWS wrote:
Jarusa wrote:
btw agree with the posters here highlighting the green-ness of this development. It is window dressing and calling the development green is stretching things. Perhaps it could best be described as green for a football club development.


Go on - name names.

I did... :oops:



OK, if I must














I agree with GWS. 8)

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 2:58 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 11:17 am
Posts: 18499
Location: threeohfivethree
baz_baz wrote:
For Goodness Sake...please dont put wind in Melveys sails.


If Melvey's right he's right.

Won't change anything. I'm sure he's still capable of being wrong some of the time. You seem to be having a fair crack at it. If you can, why not Melvey?

baz_baz wrote:
It is a football club...with football related goals and objectives. The environmetally friendly aspect is to be congratulated, however it should not and must not be put out of all proportion.


But that's where the problem lies. If you're going to talk the talk...

There's nothing in that proposal that's outside what's now regarded as "normal commercial building practice". And we're talking bottom end of the spectrum here.

The club's the one blowing it out of proportion.

baz_baz wrote:
The Visy tie-up is to sponsor the clu for 5 mil. So we by default take on some...thats right some of the credentials or selling points of the sponsor.


Perhaps we could have given each member a cardboard box?

baz_baz wrote:
We are a Football Club.

If the sponsor was Vodafone would we be up in arms because Swan didnt pull a phone apart and explain how the flowering thing works.


That's the point. If it was a phone company Swann wouldn't be doing anything of the sort. He'd accept the phones and the sponsorship and say thanks very much.

baz_baz wrote:
FFS keep things in perspective


I think I am.

Might look like a spade but it doesn't stop it being a @#$%&! shovel.

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 3:10 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 2:15 pm
Posts: 21415
Location: North of the border
To put a heating system into a building development that is 93% efficient as against the standard 81% efficient units cost about 35% more . The pay back period is about 2.5 years

I sell these systems and have been doing so for about 20 years

You know I've only ever sold 2 off 93% systems and 1000's of the 81% systems.

Going Green is a dead set wank- Developers don't want to know about it- This PP development will go the same way as every other development and thats to who ever provided the cheapest price .

The builder only wants equipment to get through defects liability period


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 3:21 pm 
Offline
John James
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 11:47 am
Posts: 651
CARLTON v HAWKS MATCHDAY ACTIVITIES

http://carltonfc.com.au/News/NewsArticl ... wsId=66487

:lol: :lol:

Fire at will!!

_________________
"You will always miss 100% of the shots you don't take"- Michael Jordan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 3:28 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 11:17 am
Posts: 18499
Location: threeohfivethree
Sydney Blue wrote:
To put a heating system into a building development that is 93% efficient as against the standard 81% efficient units cost about 35% more . The pay back period is about 2.5 years

I sell these systems and have been doing so for about 20 years

You know I've only ever sold 2 off 93% systems and 1000's of the 81% systems.

Going Green is a dead set wank- Developers don't want to know about it- This PP development will go the same way as every other development and thats to who ever provided the cheapest price .

The builder only wants equipment to get through defects liability period


I don't disagree.

We're miles behind in Australia. In Europe there are loads of developments going up that rely on the passive aspects of building design to massively improve their building's efficiency. In countries that annually have to put up with below zero temperatures there are developments that can be heated with the equivalent of a hair dryer.

Until our building industry starts to accept that the initial stages of the design process are where you make the biggest improvements you'll have to keep bashing your head against a brick wall if you want to try to sell your better performing heating systems.

If you build it right in Australia you shouldn't need heating at all.

Which may not be so good for you... :lol:

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 3:31 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 2:15 pm
Posts: 21415
Location: North of the border
GWS wrote:
Sydney Blue wrote:
To put a heating system into a building development that is 93% efficient as against the standard 81% efficient units cost about 35% more . The pay back period is about 2.5 years

I sell these systems and have been doing so for about 20 years

You know I've only ever sold 2 off 93% systems and 1000's of the 81% systems.

Going Green is a dead set wank- Developers don't want to know about it- This PP development will go the same way as every other development and thats to who ever provided the cheapest price .

The builder only wants equipment to get through defects liability period


I don't disagree.

We're miles behind in Australia. In Europe there are loads of developments going up that rely on the passive aspects of building design to massively improve their building's efficiency. In countries that annually have to put up with below zero temperatures there are developments that can be heated with the equivalent of a hair dryer.

Until our building industry starts to accept that the initial stages of the design process are where you make the biggest improvements you'll have to keep bashing your head against a brick wall if you want to try to sell your better performing heating systems.

If you build it right in Australia you shouldn't need heating at all.

Which may not be so good for you... :lol:



Don't tell any one for flowers sake :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 3:33 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 11:17 am
Posts: 18499
Location: threeohfivethree
:lol:

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 4:26 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 3:13 pm
Posts: 1042
Location: sydney
GWS wrote:
Very, very, very, very, very wierdly...




...I'm with Melvey. :shock: :shock: :shock:


If the club is serious about going green then GO GREEN.

The environmental benefits of what's being proposed aren't much greater than what's now standard for a bullshit "5 star" housing project (which is currently ridiculously low).

If we want to be seen to be leaders in the area we should be setting out to be carbon neutral at the least and preferably having a positive impact on the environment. There are that many ways we can do it and they're all relatively affordable over the medium term (and will in fact pay for themselves within a 10 year time frame).

John M wrote:
Because even a five minute study of Visy Park would tell you that the environmental story is little more than window dressing. It's a high-performance centre for elite athletes, with some community access. The 'green' tinge is a nice way for Visy's sponsorship to have some relevance, and for the money Visy pays to Juddy to remain legit.


Why put the greenwash on a development that's a lame-arsed attempt at being green when there's enough there to sell it as an elite training facility?

By connecting VISY to a project that's only paying lip-service to environmental issues all they due is question the validity of VISY's own green credentials.

As Melvey effectively said (did I really write that? :shock: ) there's no need to talk up the lame parts of this. It's all a bit "Beyond Petroleum" for mine.

Maybe the building's green credentials will be worked up over the rest of the design phase but if you were going to launch this as a "green building" then you'd want to be listing quite a few more benefits than what's currently been shown.

Had we done this properly (and I mean really properly) then the world's media would have been knocking on the door to know about the professional sporting club that is paving the way to a genuine green future.

I can't hear them knocking...

Other than that - great that the players will finally have some decent facilities.


I,m really nervous GWS about you agreeing with Mevey.

Next minute you will also agree that a 195cm, 95kg ruckman will be better placed to handle the rough and tumble of the job than a 195cm,98 kg ruckman who happens to be half the age????

BTW, can i suggest that if you are a female reading this do not assume that you have a superior knowledge base to the all seeing, late night leak from a veritable Melbourne news organisation!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 4:31 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 11:17 am
Posts: 18499
Location: threeohfivethree
7dominator wrote:
I,m really nervous GWS about you agreeing with Mevey.


You're not the only one. :lol:

If you read on you'll also see me agreeing with Sydney Blue. :shock:

It's likely chimps and Shakespeare.

If you keep tapping away long enough on a site like this you'll agree with just about everyone eventually.

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 5:21 pm 
Offline
Robert Walls
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 12:15 am
Posts: 3175
Location: The Wild West
GWS wrote:
The environmental benefits of what's being proposed aren't much greater than what's now standard for a bullshit "5 star" housing project (which is currently ridiculously low).

If we want to be seen to be leaders in the area we should be setting out to be carbon neutral at the least and preferably having a positive impact on the environment. There are that many ways we can do it and they're all relatively affordable over the medium term (and will in fact pay for themselves within a 10 year time frame).


I understand what you are getting at GWS, but do you know this for sure? I mean all I have seen mentioned in the media so far is:
Herald-Sun wrote:
The development's environmental initiatives will include rainwater collection tanks, improved water efficiency, a solar hot water system and the introduction of cutting-edge green practices.

Firstly, being a new large-scale development it is subject to compliance with clause 56 of the Victorian Planning Provisions (introduced Oct 2006) which is aimed at building sustainable neighbourhoods. In Layman's terms the development will have to meet a range of objectives in the clause to receive planning approval. Some intergrated water management techniques are mentioned above, but others such as meeting best practice for stormwater runoff quality by using water sensitive urban design techniques (developed by the CSIRO and Melbourne water) are not mentioned. Rest assured that some of the changes that will be made as a result of this development but not mentioned in the media will have much greater environmental benefits than that of a bullshit "5-star" housing project. It's chalk and cheese really, trust me I know. :wink:

GWS wrote:
Maybe the building's green credentials will be worked up over the rest of the design phase but if you were going to launch this as a "green building" then you'd want to be listing quite a few more benefits than what's currently been shown.


That's exactly right, and it will be worked up. I think you will find that there are probably a number of "green" intiatives that will be introduced as this development progresses. There are a number of initiatives that can't realistically be mentioned at this stage. Things like becoming a "Waste-Wise" (soon to be renamed "Resource Smart") business as certified by the state government's regional waste management group, becoming members of the "Eco-Buy" program are a few that can't be quoted at this stage. I would imagine that purchasing "green" energy would be one of the first initiatives that will be brought in once the development is completed.

I think you'll find that it will be fed to the media like a drip over time to keep the interest high and allow a few more press conferences with our new "Ambassador" there for everyone to see. :-D

_________________
"If everyone is moving forward together, then success takes care of itself" - Henry Ford


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 6:27 pm 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 11:44 am
Posts: 2000
GWS wrote:
baz_baz wrote:
For Goodness Sake...please dont put wind in Melveys sails.


If Melvey's right he's right.

Won't change anything. I'm sure he's still capable of being wrong some of the time. You seem to be having a fair crack at it. If you can, why not Melvey? [/quote] I'll tell you something fo nothing GWS. You thinking Melvey is right doesnt't make hime right. It just makes you wrong with him

baz_baz wrote:
It is a football club...with football related goals and objectives. The environmetally friendly aspect is to be congratulated, however it should not and must not be put out of all proportion.


[/quote] But that's where the problem lies. If you're going to talk the talk...

There's nothing in that proposal that's outside what's now regarded as "normal commercial building practice". And we're talking bottom end of the spectrum here.

The club's the one blowing it out of proportion. [/quote]

What part of "The green reference is incidental to the prroject. It is a footabll facility" Dont you understand?

baz_baz wrote:
The Visy tie-up is to sponsor the clu for 5 mil. So we by default take on some...thats right some of the credentials or selling points of the sponsor.


[/quote]Perhaps we could have given each member a cardboard box? [/quote]

Thats just a nonsensical peice of irrelevence

baz_baz wrote:
We are a Football Club.

If the sponsor was Vodafone would we be up in arms because Swan didnt pull a phone apart and explain how the flowering thing works.


[/quote]That's the point. If it was a phone company Swann wouldn't be doing anything of the sort. He'd accept the phones and the sponsorship and say thanks very much. [/quote]

Just like he is doing with Visy. Including pushing aspects of their profile

baz_baz wrote:
FFS keep things in perspective


[/quote]I think I am. [/quote]

I know your not

[/quote]Might look like a spade but it doesn't stop it being a flower shovel.[/quote] i don't agree with this statement. (original comment replaced by mods)

_________________
Go BLues


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:28 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:47 am
Posts: 18288
Location: talkingcarlton.com
baz baz...you need to practise your use of the "quote" function! :P

And also be a little bit careful in how you disagree with someone please. 8)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:34 pm 
Offline
Craig Bradley

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:04 pm
Posts: 7477
Location: Bendigo
TianaCon wrote:
CARLTON v HAWKS MATCHDAY ACTIVITIES

http://carltonfc.com.au/News/NewsArticl ... wsId=66487

:lol: :lol:

Fire at will!!




Image

Is this a recycled Tuckerbag mascot or something?... Look how the label is falling off :oops: I can't imagine him (and it has to be a him otherwise you can see her box) having to change outfits at any stage.

_________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" - Winston Churchill.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:47 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:00 am
Posts: 23123
[quote="Mrs Caz"baz baz...you need to practise your use of the "quote" function! :P

And also be a little bit careful in how you disagree with someone please. 8)[/quote]

QFT

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:48 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:47 am
Posts: 18288
Location: talkingcarlton.com
:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:50 pm 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 11:44 am
Posts: 2000
Mrs Caz wrote:
baz baz...you need to practise your use of the "quote" function! :P

And also be a little bit careful in how you disagree with someone please. 8)


Ive practised the quote and I think Ive got it :) :)
Just what part of the response do you think I need to be careful about. the responses were to the thoughts....not derogitory to the person :o

_________________
Go BLues


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:58 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:47 am
Posts: 18288
Location: talkingcarlton.com
Good work baz...

From the Guidelines:
Quote:
Do not attack other people, attack their argument - and this does not mean changing "you are an idiot" into "your comments are idiotic", as this is still considered abuse. If you take issue with someone else's position, try to explain why you disagree with them in a polite and professional manner, providing suitable supporting evidence as required.



i'd like everyone to take a refresher course please.


Now go back to discussing the merits or faults of the Visy sponsorship.




8)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 10:08 pm 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 11:44 am
Posts: 2000
baz_baz wrote:
GWS wrote:
baz_baz wrote:
For Goodness Sake...please dont put wind in Melveys sails.


If Melvey's right he's right.

Won't change anything. I'm sure he's still capable of being wrong some of the time. You seem to be having a fair crack at it.

Might look like a spade but it doesn't stop it being a flower shovel.


So Mrs Caz. How would you categorize these staements? :wink:

_________________
Go BLues


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 142 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 67 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group